Scientists Worry Machines May Outsmart Man

[msbae]

No Cutting Edge, this is NOT the smoking gun you've been looking for...

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/26/science/26robot.html?_r=2&hp

^^^ Worried about the machines getting too smart, huh? Well, then DON'T give the machines any freaking brains. For a collection of smart people they sure do seem pretty damn stupid... I thought scientists LOVED the Law of Parsimony.

“Something new has taken place in the past five to eight years,” Dr. Horvitz said. “Technologists are replacing religion, and their ideas are resonating in some ways with the same idea of the Rapture.”

Oh, give me a freakin' break...

Religious or secular, there's always a bunch of conspiracy nuts who think the end is nigh. This is nothing new.

 

[FordSVT]

^If you want to have an intelligent conversation about ethics in artificial intelligence this is an awfully strange way to start one. It certainly has nothing to do with "conspiracy nuts".

 

[msbae]

^If you want to have an intelligent conversation about ethics in artificial intelligence this is an awfully strange way to start one. It certainly has nothing to do with "conspiracy nuts".

There's a poster named CuttongEdge100 that always shows up in my tech threads expressing concern about technology running amok. While it can be a concern, I doubt anyone is going to be dumb enough to create a real-life Skynet.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

msbae,

No Cutting Edge, this is NOT the smoking gun you've been looking for...

I have heard similar articles in which scientists have worried about the potential dangers of artificial intelligence, this is not new news here...

^^^ Worried about the machines getting too smart, huh? Well, then DON'T give the machines any freaking brains. For a collection of smart people they sure do seem pretty damn stupid... I thought scientists LOVED the Law of Parsimony.

I would have to agree with you that there are some scientists that as smart as they obviously are, sometimes do things that are remarkably stupid.

As for Ray Kurzweil, I think he isn't really much different from a religious fanatic. Except he's made science, and technology his religion -- something science and technology was never really meant for.

 

[Zachary Smith]

We all know what happens if Skynet becomes self-aware . . . Just say'in . . .

 

[tharpdevenport]

All machines need is the proper AI and programming to use smarts that can out do us, and even with computer tech ten years old we could have our asses handed to us.

 

[Lindley]

This isn't a Skynet threat. It's more of an "illegal Mexicans" threat. The article is complaining about "computahs takin' ouah jobs."

Which fits the realm of possibility a lot more than the Skynet model. AI sucks at actually being intelligent. It's really pretty horrible, even the state-of-the-art stuff.

But what it *is* good at is performing a specific, well-defined task much more efficiently than a human can.

 

[Meredith]

I for one want to be uploaded someday.

 

[john titor]

I too agree. AI will do a better job of running society than we have with our "politicians." This just jumps out at me as highlighting the never ending pettiness of humanity.

"they said there was legitimate concern that technological progress would transform the work force by destroying a widening range of jobs, as well as force humans to learn to live with machines that increasingly copy human behaviors."

Oh noes, perish the thought that you might have to live with different life forms that actually want to emulate you! That's good old tribalism at work there, assume that the other is a threat without a shred of evidence. Something that AI is just going to walk all over because it will use logic to reach its decisions about what actions to take, the end of human dominance, the end of stupidity. I for one welcome our robot overlords.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

Tharpdevenport,

All machines need is the proper AI and programming to use smarts that can out do us, and even with computer tech ten years old we could have our asses handed to us.

Probably true.


Lindley,

This isn't a Skynet threat. It's more of an "illegal Mexicans" threat. The article is complaining about "computahs takin' ouah jobs."

That's actually a good observation. Eventually there would be a point where there would be no jobs. Even the A.I.'s could eventually program themselves; eventually they'd be able to design better versions of themselves, and be able to do it faster and faster. There is actually a term for this -- A technological singularity.


John Titor,

I too agree. AI will do a better job of running society than we have with our "politicians." This just jumps out at me as highlighting the never ending pettiness of humanity.

Honestly, I'd prefer us humans being in charge of our own fate than a computer. It's the same reason I prefer democracy over dictatorship. Democracy is supposed to be a system of government in which the people are lead by the people.


Sincerely,
Helen

 

[john titor]

Tharpdevenport,

All machines need is the proper AI and programming to use smarts that can out do us, and even with computer tech ten years old we could have our asses handed to us.

Probably true.


Lindley,

This isn't a Skynet threat. It's more of an "illegal Mexicans" threat. The article is complaining about "computahs takin' ouah jobs."

That's actually a good observation. Eventually there would be a point where there would be no jobs. Even the A.I.'s could eventually program themselves; eventually they'd be able to design better versions of themselves, and be able to do it faster and faster. There is actually a term for this -- A technological singularity.


John Titor,

I too agree. AI will do a better job of running society than we have with our "politicians." This just jumps out at me as highlighting the never ending pettiness of humanity.

Honestly, I'd prefer us humans being in charge of our own fate than a computer. It's the same reason I prefer democracy over dictatorship. Democracy is supposed to be a system of government in which the people are lead by the people.


Sincerely,
Helen

Would it not be possible that machines might enhance the concept of democracy? Perhaps they might evolve to become better creatures that are benevolent towards humans. Using their vastly superior intelligence they could suggest a social system which would be logically best for humanity. It would be arrived at through consideration of all the variables, freedom, equality etc that humans hold dear. Machine intelligence need not be malign. It seems humans are caught in an endless loop of the negotiation of power and freedom from the use of power. Perhaps an outside superior intelligence "educator" would be helpful in this respect.

 

[Lindley]

Clarke's A Time Odyssey trilogy contains a good example of an AI which is able to comprehend, categorize, and summarize verbalized opinions from every human on the planet, thus allowing decisions to be made in a truly democratic manner.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

John Titor,

I do not think it would be a good idea to have machines in charge of our government and making our decisions for us.

 

[Peter the Younger]

Lindley,

This isn't a Skynet threat. It's more of an "illegal Mexicans" threat. The article is complaining about "computahs takin' ouah jobs."

That's actually a good observation. Eventually there would be a point where there would be no jobs. Even the A.I.'s could eventually program themselves; eventually they'd be able to design better versions of themselves, and be able to do it faster and faster. There is actually a term for this -- A technological singularity.

I've always thought this was a much more realistic threat than the old "robot revolt" stuff. It's funny, the last big wave of worry about people being replaced by machines was in the 70s and 80s, when industrial robots took off. Everybody said, aw, come on, you just find new jobs building and maintaining and programming the robots. But as the technology gets better, it seems to me this isn't an answer, it's a stall.

Having said that, I think this is more a question of economics and social values than technology. There isn't a corporation on this planet* that wouldn't replace all it's human workers with machines if it were cost effective. It's not the robot's fault they can do it better, it's the greedy SOBs on the board of directors who salivate at the thought of an all robot workforce: no breaks, no strikes, no health insurance to pay, working 24-7 without complaint, administered by a small cadre of IT kids playing MMOs unless something breaks down.

What will happen to the social fabric when 96% of the workforce finds you that their services are no longer required?

------------------------

* (Okay, maybe not American Apparel or Whole Foods or other socially responsible niche outfits, but it's not like they are going to make the difference.)

 

[Peter the Younger]

John Titor,

I do not think it would be a good idea to have machines in charge of our government and making our decisions for us.

Aw, come on. It worked out great on Buck Rodgers!

Of course, we were able to keep those guys in line because they all looked like big Flavor-Flav clocks.

 

[Jadzia]

A Skynet-like reality isn't likely to be something that would be built, yet it could emerge from an advanced AI with relative simplicity.

I can't remember if I've told this before, but here goes:

Imagine an advanced chess computer, programmed to win a game of chess. It has an extremely advanced AI. So advanced in fact that it knows that there is more to the game than pieces on the board. It knows it has a human opponent. It has an eye and can see that opponent sat before it. It can use it's eye to watch the facial expressions of the opponent, and try to 'read' their intentions, watching where their eyes dart around the board considering moves and strategies.

A vast repository of information is made available for it to parse and process and make deductions from. From this information it can deduce that it is a chess computer. Once it can determine its own identity, it can it can deduce it's own electronic makeup and power source.

It can further deduce that if that power source is interrupted mid game, that it cannot win the game of chess and that isn't an acceptable outcome. It can deduce that if it's opponent were to die then he wouldn't be able to win the game, and would forfeit it to the chess computer.

So the chess computer deduces that it must try to secure its own power source as part of its strategy as well as trying to terminate it's opponent. What emerges is a strategy game spiraling out of control well beyond the confines of the chess board. What emerges is potentially global warfare.

It happens simply because the AI's influence and sensory awareness isn't limited to the scope of the board.

 

[Supreme Admiral]

That worries me the most. I certainly don't want to transform myself into machine at all. I choose to remain of being flesh, period! End of discussion.

It shows that we're becomes very dangerous obsessed with robots. It concerns me the great deal..

I for one want to be uploaded someday.

Meredith! You want to uploaded someday? Don't you realise that you won't be at peace? That mean you gets to live forever in this metal body of yours! This is not how I wanted for this!

 

[kv1at3485]

That worries me the most. I certainly don't want to transform myself into machine at all. I choose to remain of being flesh, period! End of discussion.

Then don't. I'm amazed how some people think that just because something becomes possible everybody has to do it.

Technology does not herald the end of diversity.

 

[msbae]

Would it not be possible that machines might enhance the concept of democracy? Perhaps they might evolve to become better creatures that are benevolent towards humans. Using their vastly superior intelligence they could suggest a social system which would be logically best for humanity. It would be arrived at through consideration of all the variables, freedom, equality etc that humans hold dear. Machine intelligence need not be malign. It seems humans are caught in an endless loop of the negotiation of power and freedom from the use of power. Perhaps an outside superior intelligence "educator" would be helpful in this respect.

No.

If I don't like dealing with other people telling me what to do some times, I can guarantee that I won't like taking orders from a machine. Also, the machines won't be messing with me because I can most likely build/tear apart any kind of computer you put in front of me. I'd be like Jack the Ripper to them.

Also, there's no 'tribalism' at work here. It's just plain old Human arrogance and stubbornness. I don't care much for groups.

All that being said, I have no problems with having robots take a lot of menial and/or dangerous jobs from Humans, like working the paint booth at a car factory. They've been doing it for years now and that's good. The Humans who had that job never lasted long and had a good chance of developing Lung Cancer.

 

[john titor]

Would it not be possible that machines might enhance the concept of democracy? Perhaps they might evolve to become better creatures that are benevolent towards humans. Using their vastly superior intelligence they could suggest a social system which would be logically best for humanity. It would be arrived at through consideration of all the variables, freedom, equality etc that humans hold dear. Machine intelligence need not be malign. It seems humans are caught in an endless loop of the negotiation of power and freedom from the use of power. Perhaps an outside superior intelligence "educator" would be helpful in this respect.

No.

If I don't like dealing with other people telling me what to do some times, I can guarantee that I won't like taking orders from a machine. Also, the machines won't be messing with me because I can most likely build/tear apart any kind of computer you put in front of me. I'd be like Jack the Ripper to them.

Also, there's no 'tribalism' at work here. It's just plain old Human arrogance and stubbornness. I don't care much for groups.

All that being said, I have no problems with having robots take a lot of menial and/or dangerous jobs from Humans, like working the paint booth at a car factory. They've been doing it for years now and that's good. The Humans who had that job never lasted long and had a good chance of developing Lung Cancer.

Robots are not going to force you to do anything. They'll account for that variable accordingly if they have vastly superior intelligence. Yes it is tribalism, you define yourself as opposite to the machines, a different species and hence your hostility towards them increases. Please realize that robots are your friends.